顯示包含「持不同政見者」標籤的文章。顯示所有文章
顯示包含「持不同政見者」標籤的文章。顯示所有文章

12/11/2008

【轉載】《08憲章》英譯版

Charter 08

I. Foreword

A hundred years have passed since the writing of China’s first constitution. 2008 also marks the sixtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the thirtieth anniversary of the appearance of Democracy Wall in Beijing, and the tenth of China’s signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are approaching the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre of pro-democracy student protesters. The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

By departing from these values, the Chinese government’s approach to “modernization” has proven disastrous. It has stripped people of their rights, destroyed their dignity, and corrupted normal human intercourse. So we ask: Where is China headed in the twenty-first century? Will it continue with “modernization” under authoritarian rule, or will it embrace universal human values, join the mainstream of civilized nations, and build a democratic system? There can be no avoiding these questions.

The shock of the Western impact upon China in the nineteenth century laid bare a decadent authoritarian system and marked the beginning of what is often called “the greatest changes in thousands of years” for China. A “self-strengthening movement” followed, but this aimed simply at appropriating the technology to build gunboats and other Western material objects. China’s humiliating naval defeat at the hands of Japan in 1895 only confirmed the obsolescence of China’s system of government. The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China’s imperial court. With the revolution of 1911, which inaugurated Asia’s first republic, the authoritarian imperial system that had lasted for centuries was finally supposed to have been laid to rest. But social conflict inside our country and external pressures were to prevent it; China fell into a patchwork of warlord fiefdoms and the new republic became a fleeting dream.

The failure of both “self-strengthening” and political renovation caused many of our forebears to reflect deeply on whether a “cultural illness” was afflicting our country. This mood gave rise, during the May Fourth Movement of the late 1910s, to the championing of “science and democracy.” Yet that effort, too, foundered as warlord chaos persisted and the Japanese invasion [beginning in Manchuria in 1931] brought national crisis.

Victory over Japan in 1945 offered one more chance for China to move toward modern government, but the Communist defeat of the Nationalists in the civil war thrust the nation into the abyss of totalitarianism. The “new China” that emerged in 1949 proclaimed that “the people are sovereign” but in fact set up a system in which “the Party is all-powerful.” The Communist Party of China seized control of all organs of the state and all political, economic, and social resources, and, using these, has produced a long trail of human rights disasters, including, among many others, the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957), the Great Leap Forward (1958–1960), the Cultural Revolution (1966–1969), the June Fourth (Tiananmen Square) Massacre (1989), and the current repression of all unauthorized religions and the suppression of the weiquan rights movement [a movement that aims to defend citizens’ rights promulgated in the Chinese Constitution and to fight for human rights recognized by international conventions that the Chinese government has signed]. During all this, the Chinese people have paid a gargantuan price. Tens of millions have lost their lives, and several generations have seen their freedom, their happiness, and their human dignity cruelly trampled.

During the last two decades of the twentieth century the government policy of “Reform and Opening” gave the Chinese people relief from the pervasive poverty and totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era and brought substantial increases in the wealth and living standards of many Chinese as well as a partial restoration of economic freedom and economic rights. Civil society began to grow, and popular calls for more rights and more political freedom have grown apace. As the ruling elite itself moved toward private ownership and the market economy, it began to shift from an outright rejection of “rights” to a partial acknowledgment of them.

In 1998 the Chinese government signed two important international human rights conventions; in 2004 it amended its constitution to include the phrase “respect and protect human rights”; and this year, 2008, it has promised to promote a “national human rights action plan.” Unfortunately most of this political progress has extended no further than the paper on which it is written. The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change.

The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people.

As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional.

II. Our Fundamental Principles

This is a historic moment for China, and our future hangs in the balance. In reviewing the political modernization process of the past hundred years or more, we reiterate and endorse basic universal values as follows:

Freedom. Freedom is at the core of universal human values. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom in where to live, and the freedoms to strike, to demonstrate, and to protest, among others, are the forms that freedom takes. Without freedom, China will always remain far from civilized ideals.

Human rights. Human rights are not bestowed by a state. Every person is born with inherent rights to dignity and freedom. The government exists for the protection of the human rights of its citizens. The exercise of state power must be authorized by the people. The succession of political disasters in China’s recent history is a direct consequence of the ruling regime’s disregard for human rights.

Equality. The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every person—regardless of social station, occupation, sex, economic condition, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief—are the same as those of any other. Principles of equality before the law and equality of social, economic, cultural, civil, and political rights must be upheld.

Republicanism. Republicanism, which holds that power should be balanced among different branches of government and competing interests should be served, resembles the traditional Chinese political ideal of “fairness in all under heaven.” It allows different interest groups and social assemblies, and people with a variety of cultures and beliefs, to exercise democratic self-government and to deliberate in order to reach peaceful resolution of public questions on a basis of equal access to government and free and fair competition.

Democracy. The most fundamental principles of democracy are that the people are sovereign and the people select their government. Democracy has these characteristics: (1) Political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people. (2) Political power is exercised through choices that the people make. (3) The holders of major official posts in government at all levels are determined through periodic competitive elections. (4) While honoring the will of the majority, the fundamental dignity, freedom, and human rights of minorities are protected. In short, democracy is a modern means for achieving government truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Constitutional rule. Constitutional rule is rule through a legal system and legal regulations to implement principles that are spelled out in a constitution. It means protecting the freedom and the rights of citizens, limiting and defining the scope of legitimate government power, and providing the administrative apparatus necessary to serve these ends.

III. What We Advocate

Authoritarianism is in general decline throughout the world; in China, too, the era of emperors and overlords is on the way out. The time is arriving everywhere for citizens to be masters of states. For China the path that leads out of our current predicament is to divest ourselves of the authoritarian notion of reliance on an “enlightened overlord” or an “honest official” and to turn instead toward a system of liberties, democracy, and the rule of law, and toward fostering the consciousness of modern citizens who see rights as fundamental and participation as a duty. Accordingly, and in a spirit of this duty as responsible and constructive citizens, we offer the following recommendations on national governance, citizens’ rights, and social development:

1. A New Constitution. We should recast our present constitution, rescinding its provisions that contradict the principle that sovereignty resides with the people and turning it into a document that genuinely guarantees human rights, authorizes the exercise of public power, and serves as the legal underpinning of China’s democratization. The constitution must be the highest law in the land, beyond violation by any individual, group, or political party.

2. Separation of powers. We should construct a modern government in which the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive power is guaranteed. We need an Administrative Law that defines the scope of government responsibility and prevents abuse of administrative power. Government should be responsible to taxpayers. Division of power between provincial governments and the central government should adhere to the principle that central powers are only those specifically granted by the constitution and all other powers belong to the local governments.

3. Legislative democracy. Members of legislative bodies at all levels should be chosen by direct election, and legislative democracy should observe just and impartial principles.

4. An Independent Judiciary. The rule of law must be above the interests of any particular political party and judges must be independent. We need to establish a constitutional supreme court and institute procedures for constitutional review. As soon as possible, we should abolish all of the Committees on Political and Legal Affairs that now allow Communist Party officials at every level to decide politically-sensitive cases in advance and out of court. We should strictly forbid the use of public offices for private purposes.

5. Public Control of Public Servants. The military should be made answerable to the national government, not to a political party, and should be made more professional. Military personnel should swear allegiance to the constitution and remain nonpartisan. Political party organizations shall be prohibited in the military. All public officials including police should serve as nonpartisans, and the current practice of favoring one political party in the hiring of public servants must end.

6. Guarantee of Human Rights. There shall be strict guarantees of human rights and respect for human dignity. There should be a Human Rights Committee, responsible to the highest legislative body, that will prevent the government from abusing public power in violation of human rights. A democratic and constitutional China especially must guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one shall suffer illegal arrest, detention, arraignment, interrogation, or punishment. The system of “Reeducation through Labor” must be abolished.

7. Election of Public Officials. There shall be a comprehensive system of democratic elections based on “one person, one vote.” The direct election of administrative heads at the levels of county, city, province, and nation should be systematically implemented. The rights to hold periodic free elections and to participate in them as a citizen are inalienable.

8. Rural–Urban Equality. The two-tier household registry system must be abolished. This system favors urban residents and harms rural residents. We should establish instead a system that gives every citizen the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live.

9. Freedom to Form Groups. The right of citizens to form groups must be guaranteed. The current system for registering nongovernment groups, which requires a group to be “approved,” should be replaced by a system in which a group simply registers itself. The formation of political parties should be governed by the constitution and the laws, which means that we must abolish the special privilege of one party to monopolize power and must guarantee principles of free and fair competition among political parties.

10. Freedom to Assemble. The constitution provides that peaceful assembly, demonstration, protest, and freedom of expression are fundamental rights of a citizen. The ruling party and the government must not be permitted to subject these to illegal interference or unconstitutional obstruction.

11. Freedom of Expression. We should make freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom universal, thereby guaranteeing that citizens can be informed and can exercise their right of political supervision. These freedoms should be upheld by a Press Law that abolishes political restrictions on the press. The provision in the current Criminal Law that refers to “the crime of incitement to subvert state power” must be abolished. We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes.

12. Freedom of Religion. We must guarantee freedom of religion and belief and institute a separation of religion and state. There must be no governmental interference in peaceful religious activities. We should abolish any laws, regulations, or local rules that limit or suppress the religious freedom of citizens. We should abolish the current system that requires religious groups (and their places of worship) to get official approval in advance and substitute for it a system in which registry is optional and, for those who choose to register, automatic.

13. Civic Education. In our schools we should abolish political curriculums and examinations that are designed to indoctrinate students in state ideology and to instill support for the rule of one party. We should replace them with civic education that advances universal values and citizens’ rights, fosters civic consciousness, and promotes civic virtues that serve society.

14. Protection of Private Property. We should establish and protect the right to private property and promote an economic system of free and fair markets. We should do away with government monopolies in commerce and industry and guarantee the freedom to start new enterprises. We should establish a Committee on State-Owned Property, reporting to the national legislature, that will monitor the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership in a fair, competitive, and orderly manner. We should institute a land reform that promotes private ownership of land, guarantees the right to buy and sell land, and allows the true value of private property to be adequately reflected in the market.

15. Financial and Tax Reform. We should establish a democratically regulated and accountable system of public finance that ensures the protection of taxpayer rights and that operates through legal procedures. We need a system by which public revenues that belong to a certain level of government—central, provincial, county or local—are controlled at that level. We need major tax reform that will abolish any unfair taxes, simplify the tax system, and spread the tax burden fairly. Government officials should not be able to raise taxes, or institute new ones, without public deliberation and the approval of a democratic assembly. We should reform the ownership system in order to encourage competition among a wider variety of market participants.

16. Social Security. We should establish a fair and adequate social security system that covers all citizens and ensures basic access to education, health care, retirement security, and employment.

17. Protection of the Environment. We need to protect the natural environment and to promote development in a way that is sustainable and responsible to our descendents and to the rest of humanity. This means insisting that the state and its officials at all levels not only do what they must do to achieve these goals, but also accept the supervision and participation of non-governmental organizations.

18. A Federated Republic. A democratic China should seek to act as a responsible major power contributing toward peace and development in the Asian Pacific region by approaching others in a spirit of equality and fairness. In Hong Kong and Macao, we should support the freedoms that already exist. With respect to Taiwan, we should declare our commitment to the principles of freedom and democracy and then, negotiating as equals, and ready to compromise, seek a formula for peaceful unification. We should approach disputes in the national-minority areas of China with an open mind, seeking ways to find a workable framework within which all ethnic and religious groups can flourish. We should aim ultimately at a federation of democratic communities of China.

19. Truth in Reconciliation. We should restore the reputations of all people, including their family members, who suffered political stigma in the political campaigns of the past or who have been labeled as criminals because of their thought, speech, or faith. The state should pay reparations to these people. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released. There should be a Truth Investigation Commission charged with finding the facts about past injustices and atrocities, determining responsibility for them, upholding justice, and, on these bases, seeking social reconciliation.

China, as a major nation of the world, as one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as a member of the UN Council on Human Rights, should be contributing to peace for humankind and progress toward human rights. Unfortunately, we stand today as the only country among the major nations that remains mired in authoritarian politics. Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises, thereby not only constricting China’s own development but also limiting the progress of all of human civilization. This must change, truly it must. The democratization of Chinese politics can be put off no longer.

Accordingly, we dare to put civic spirit into practice by announcing Charter 08. We hope that our fellow citizens who feel a similar sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether they are inside the government or not, and regardless of their social status, will set aside small differences to embrace the broad goals of this citizens’ movement. Together we can work for major changes in Chinese society and for the rapid establishment of a free, democratic, and constitutional country. We can bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years, and can bring a brilliant new chapter to Chinese civilization.

translated from the Chinese by Perry Link

(此譯文將刊於新一期The New York Review of Books)

【轉載】《08憲章》

08宪章

一、前言

今年是中国立宪百年,《世界人权宣言》公布60周年,“民主墙”诞生30周年,中国政府签署《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》10周年。在经历了长期的人权灾难和艰难曲折的抗争历程之后,觉醒的中国公民日渐清楚地认识到,自由、平等、人权是人类共同的普世价值;民主、共和、宪政是现代政治的基本制度架构。抽离了这些普世价值和基本政制架构的“现代化”,是剥夺人的权利、腐蚀人性、摧毁人的尊严的灾难过程。21世纪的中国将走向何方,是继续这种威权统治下的“ 现代化”,还是认同普世价值、融入主流文明、建立民主政体?这是一个不容回避的抉择。

19世纪中期的历史巨变,暴露了中国传统专制制度的腐朽,揭开了中华大地上“数千年未有之大变局”的序幕。洋务运动追求器物层面的进良,甲午战败再次暴露了体制的过时;戊戌变法触及到制度层面的革新,终因顽固派的残酷镇压而归于失败;辛亥革命在表面上埋葬了延续2000多年的皇权制度,建立了亚洲第一个共和国。囿于当时内忧外患的特定历史条件,共和政体只是昙花一现,专制主义旋即卷土重来。器物模仿和制度更新的失败,推动国人深入到对文化病根的反思,遂有以“科学与民主”为旗帜的“五四”新文化运动,因内战频仍和外敌入侵,中国政治民主化历程被迫中断。抗日战争胜利后的中国再次开启了宪政历程,然而国共内战的结果使中国陷入了现代极权主义的深渊。1949年建立的“新中国”,名义上是“人民共和国”,实质上是“党天下”。执政党垄断了所有政治、经济和社会资源,制造了反右、大跃进、文革、六四、打压民间宗教活动与维权运动等一系列人权灾难,致使数千万人失去生命,国民和国家都付出了极为惨重的代价。

二十世纪后期的“改革开放”,使中国摆脱了毛泽东时代的普遍贫困和绝对极权,民间财富和民众生活水平有了大幅度提高,个人的经济自由和社会权利得到部分恢复,公民社会开始生长,民间对人权和政治自由的呼声日益高涨。执政者也在进行走向市场化和私有化的经济改革的同时,开始了从拒绝人权到逐渐承认人权的转变。中国政府于1997年、1998年分别签署了两个重要的国际人权公约,全国人大于2004年通过修宪把“尊重和保障人权”写进宪法,今年又承诺制订和推行《国家人权行动计划》。但是,这些政治进步迄今为止大多停留在纸面上;有法律而无法治,有宪法而无宪政,仍然是有目共睹的政治现实。执政集团继续坚持维系威权统治,排拒政治变革,由此导致官场腐败,法治难立,人权不彰,道德沦丧,社会两极分化,经济畸形发展,自然环境和人文环境遭到双重破坏,公民的自由、财产和追求幸福的权利得不到制度化的保障,各种社会矛盾不断积累,不满情绪持续高涨,特别是官民对立激化和群体事件激增,正在显示着灾难性的失控趋势,现行体制的落伍已经到了非改不可的地步。

二、我们的基本理念

当此决定中国未来命运的历史关头,有必要反思百年来的现代化历程,重申如下基本理念:

自由:自由是普世价值的核心之所在。言论、出版、信仰、集会、结社、迁徙、罢工和游行示威等权利都是自由的具体体现。自由不昌,则无现代文明可言。

人权:人权不是国家的赐予,而是每个人与生俱来就享有的权利。保障人权,既是政府的首要目标和公共权力合法性的基础,也是“以人为本”的内在要求。中国的历次政治灾难都与执政当局对人权的无视密切相关。人是国家的主体,国家服务于人民,政府为人民而存在。

平等:每一个个体的人,不论社会地位、职业、性别、经济状况、种族、肤色、宗教或政治信仰,其人格、尊严、自由都是平等的。必须落实法律面前人人平等的原则,落实公民的社会、经济、文化、政治权利平等的原则。

共和:共和就是“大家共治,和平共生”,就是分权制衡与利益平衡,就是多种利益成分、不同社会集团、多元文化与信仰追求的群体,在平等参与、公平竞争、共同议政的基础上,以和平的方式处理公共事务。

民主:最基本的涵义是主权在民和民选政府。民主具有如下基本特点:(1)政权的合法性来自人民,政治权力来源于人民;(2)政治统治经过人民选择,(3)公民享有真正的选举权,各级政府的主要政务官员必须通过定期的竞选产生。(4)尊重多数人的决定,同时保护少数人的基本人权。一句话,民主使政府成为“民有,民治,民享”的现代公器。

宪政:宪政是通过法律规定和法治来保障宪法确定的公民基本自由和权利的原则,限制并划定政府权力和行为的边界,并提供相应的制度设施。

在中国,帝国皇权的时代早已一去不复返了;在世界范围内,威权体制也日近黄昏;公民应该成为真正的国家主人。祛除依赖“明君”、“清官”的臣民意识,张扬权利为本、参与为责的公民意识,实践自由,躬行民主,尊奉法治,才是中国的根本出路。

三、我们的基本主张

藉此,我们本着负责任与建设性的公民精神对国家政制、公民权利与社会发展诸方面提出如下具体主张:

1、修改宪法:根据前述价值理念修改宪法,删除现行宪法中不符合主权在民原则的条文,使宪法真正成为人权的保证书和公共权力的许可状,成为任何个人、团体和党派不得违反的可以实施的最高法律,为中国民主化奠定法权基础。

2、分权制衡:构建分权制衡的现代政府,保证立法、司法、行政三权分立。确立法定行政和责任政府的原则,防止行政权力过分扩张;政府应对纳税人负责;在中央和地方之间建立分权与制衡制度,中央权力须由宪法明确界定授权,地方实行充分自治。

3、立法民主:各级立法机构由直选产生,立法秉持公平正义原则,实行立法民主。

4、司法独立:司法应超越党派、不受任何干预,实行司法独立,保障司法公正;设立宪法法院,建立违宪审查制度,维护宪法权威。尽早撤销严重危害国家法治的各级党的政法委员会,避免公器私用。

5、公器公用:实现军队国家化,军人应效忠于宪法,效忠于国家,政党组织应从军队中退出,提高军队职业化水平。包括警察在内的所有公务员应保持政治中立。消除公务员录用的党派歧视,应不分党派平等录用。

6、人权保障:切实保障人权,维护人的尊严。设立对最高民意机关负责的人权委员会,防止政府滥用公权侵犯人权,尤其要保障公民的人身自由,任何人不受非法逮捕、拘禁、传讯、审问、处罚,废除劳动教养制度。

7、公职选举:全面推行民主选举制度,落实一人一票的平等选举权。各级行政首长的直接选举应制度化地逐步推行。定期自由竞争选举和公民参选法定公共职务是不可剥夺的基本人权。

8、城乡平等:废除现行的城乡二元户籍制度,落实公民一律平等的宪法权利,保障公民的自由迁徙权。

9、结社自由:保障公民的结社自由权,将现行的社团登记审批制改为备案制。开放党禁,以宪法和法律规范政党行为,取消一党垄断执政特权,确立政党活动自由和公平竞争的原则,实现政党政治正常化和法制化。

10、集会自由:和平集会、游行、示威和表达自由,是宪法规定的公民基本自由,不应受到执政党和政府的非法干预与违宪限制。

11、言论自由:落实言论自由、出版自由和学术自由,保障公民的知情权和监督权。制订《新闻法》和《出版法》,开放报禁,废除现行《刑法》中的“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”条款,杜绝以言治罪。

12、宗教自由:保障宗教自由与信仰自由,实行政教分离,宗教信仰活动不受政府干预。审查并撤销限制或剥夺公民宗教自由的行政法规、行政规章和地方性法规;禁止以行政立法管理宗教活动。废除宗教团体(包括宗教活动场所)必经登记始获合法地位的事先许可制度,代之以无须任何审查的备案制。

13、公民教育:取消服务于一党统治、带有浓厚意识形态色彩的政治教育与政治考试,推广以普世价值和公民权利为本的公民教育,确立公民意识,倡导服务社会的公民美德。

14、财产保护:确立和保护私有财产权利,实行自由、开放的市场经济制度,保障创业自由,消除行政垄断;设立对最高民意机关负责的国有资产管理委员会,合法有序地展开产权改革,明晰产权归属和责任者;开展新土地运动,推进土地私有化,切实保障公民尤其是农民的土地所有权。

15、财税改革:确立民主财政和保障纳税人的权利。建立权责明确的公共财政制度构架和运行机制,建立各级政府合理有效的财政分权体系;对赋税制度进行重大改革,以降低税率、简化税制、公平税负。非经社会公共选择过程,民意机关决议,行政部门不得随意加税、开征新税。通过产权改革,引进多元市场主体和竞争机制,降低金融准入门槛,为发展民间金融创造条件,使金融体系充分发挥活力。

16、社会保障:建立覆盖全体国民的社会保障体制,使国民在教育、医疗、养老和就业等方面得到最基本的保障。

17、环境保护:保护生态环境,提倡可持续发展,为子孙后代和全人类负责;明确落实国家和各级官员必须为此承担的相应责任;发挥民间组织在环境保护中的参与和监督作用。

18、联邦共和:以平等、公正的态度参与维持地区和平与发展,塑造一个负责任的大国形象。维护香港、澳门的自由制度。在自由民主的前提下,通过平等谈判与合作互动的方式寻求海峡两岸和解方案。以大智慧探索各民族共同繁荣的可能途径和制度设计,在民主宪政的架构下建立中华联邦共和国。

19、转型正义:为历次政治运动中遭受政治迫害的人士及其家属,恢复名誉,给予国家赔偿;释放所有政治犯和良心犯,释放所有因信仰而获罪的人员;成立真相调查委员会,查清历史事件的真相,厘清责任,伸张正义;在此基础上寻求社会和解。

四、结语

中国作为世界大国,作为联合国安理会五个常任理事国之一和人权理事会的成员,理应为人类和平事业与人权进步做出自身的贡献。但令人遗憾的是,在当今世界的所有大国里,唯独中国还处在威权主义政治生态中,并由此造成连绵不断的人权灾难和社会危机,束缚了中华民族的自身发展,制约了人类文明的进步——这种局面必须改变!政治民主化变革不能再拖延下去。

为此,我们本着勇于践行的公民精神,公布《零八宪章》。我们希望所有具有同样危机感、责任感和使命感的中国公民,不分朝野,不论身份,求同存异,积极参与到公民运动中来,共同推动中国社会的伟大变革,以期早日建成一个自由、民主、宪政的国家,实现国人百余年来锲而不舍的追求与梦想。

签署人:303人

于浩成(北京,法学家)
张思之(北京,律师)
茅于轼(北京,经济学家)
杜 光 (北京,政治学家)
李 普 (北京,老记者)
沙叶新(上海,剧作家)
流沙河(四川,诗人)
吴茂华(四川,作家)
张显扬(北京,思想家)
孙文广(山东,教授)
鲍 彤(北京,公民)
丁子霖(北京,教授)
张先玲(北京,工程师)
徐 珏(北京,研究员)
蒋培坤(北京,教授)
刘晓波(北京,作家)
张祖桦(北京,宪政学者)
高 瑜(北京,记者)
戴 晴(北京,作家)
江棋生(北京,学者)
艾晓明(广东,教授)
刘军宁(北京,政治学家)
张旭昆(浙江,教授)
徐友渔(北京,哲学家)
贺卫方(北京,法学家)
莫少平(北京,律师)
陈子明(北京,学者)
张博树(北京,政治学家)
崔卫平(北京,学者)
何光沪(宗教学专家)
郝 建(北京,学者)
沈敏骅(浙江,教授)
李大同(北京,记者)
栗宪庭(北京,艺术评论家)
张 鸣(北京,教授)
余 杰(北京,作家)
余世存(北京,作家)
秦 耕(海南,作家)
周 舵(北京,学者 )
浦志强(北京,律师)
赵达功(深圳,作家)
姚立法(湖北,选举专家)
冯正虎(上海,学者)
周 勍(北京,作家)
杨恒均(广州,作家)
滕 彪(北京,法学博士)
蒋亶文(上海,作家)
唯 色(西藏,作家)
马 波(北京,作家)
查建英 (北京,作家)
胡发云(湖北,作家)
焦国标(北京,学者)
李公明(广东,教授)
莫之许(北京,评论家)
李柏光(北京,法学博士)
傅国涌(浙江,作家)
马少方(广东,商人)
张 闳(上海,教授)
夏业良(北京,经济学家)
冉云飞(四川,学者)
廖亦武(四川,作家)
王 怡(四川,学者)
王晓渔(上海,学者)
苏元真 (浙江,教授)
强剑衷(南京,老报人)
欧阳小戎(云南,诗人)
刘 荻(北京,自由职业者)
昝爱宗(浙江,记者)
周鸿陵(北京,社会活动家)
冯 刚(浙江 教授)
陈 林(广州 学者)
尹 贤(甘肃,诗人)
周 明(浙江,教授)
凌沧洲(北京,新闻人)
铁 流(北京,作家)
陈奉孝(山东,北大右派学生)
姚 博(北京,评论家)
张津郡(广东,职业经理人)
李剑虹(上海,作家)
张善光(湖南,人权捍卫者)
李德铭(湖南,新闻工作者)
刘建安(湖南,教师)
王小山(北京,媒体人)
范亚峰(北京,法学博士)
周明初(浙江,教授)
梁晓燕(北京,环保志愿者)
徐 晓(北京,作家)
陈 西(贵州,人权捍卫者)
赵 诚(山西,学者)
李元龙(贵州,自由撰稿人)
申有连(贵州,人权捍卫者)
蒋绥敏(北京,工程师)
陆中明(陕西,学者)
孟 煌(北京,画家)
林福武(福建,人权捍卫者)
廖双元(贵州,人权捍卫者)
卢雪松(吉林,教师)
郭玉闪(北京,学者)
陈焕辉(福建,人权捍卫者)
朱久虎(北京,律师)
金光鸿(北京,律师)
高超群(北京,编辑)
柏 风(吉林,诗人)
郑旭光(北京,学者)
曾金燕 (北京 维权人士)
吴玉琴(贵州,人权捍卫者)
杜义龙(陕西,作家)
李 海(北京,人权捍卫者)
张 辉(山西,民主人士)
江 山(广东,业主维权者)
徐国庆(贵州,民主人士)
吴 郁(贵州,民主人士)
张明珍(贵州,民主人士)
曾 宁(贵州,民主人士)
全林志(贵州,民主人士)
叶 航(浙江,教授)
马云龙(河南,资深媒体人)
朱健国(广东,自由撰稿人)
李 铁(广东,社会活动人士)
莫建刚(贵州,自由撰稿人)
张耀杰(北京,学者)
吴报建(浙江,律师)
杨 光(广西,学者)
俞梅荪(北京,法律人)
行 健(北京,法律人)
王光泽(北京,社会活动家)
陈绍华(广东,设计师)
刘逸明(湖北,自由撰稿人)
吴祚来(北京,研究员)
高 兟(山东,艺术家)
高 强(山东,艺术家)
唐荆陵(广东,律师)
黎小龙(广西,维权人士)
荆 楚(广西,自由撰稿人)
李 彪(安徽,商人)
郭 艳(广东,律师)
杨世元(浙江,退休人员)
杨宽兴(山东,作家)
李金芳(河北,民主人士)
王玉文(贵州,诗人)
杨中义(安徽,工人)
武辛源(河北 农民)
杜和平(贵州,民主人士)
冯 玲(湖北,宪政义工)
张先忠(湖北,企业家)
蔡敬忠(广东 农民)
王典斌(湖北,企业主)
蔡金才(广东 农民)
高爱国(湖北,企业主)
陈湛尧(广东 农民)
何文凯(湖北,企业主)
吴党英(上海,维权人士)
曾庆彬(广东 工人)
毛海秀(上海,维权人士)
庄道鹤(杭州,律师)
黎雄兵(北京,律师)
李任科(贵州,民主人士)
左 力(河北 律师)
董德筑(贵州,民主人士)
陶玉平(贵州,民主人士)
王俊秀(北京,IT从业者)
黄晓敏(四川,维权人士)
郑恩宠(上海,法律人)
张君令(上海,维权人士)
杨 海(陕西,学者)
艾福荣(上海,维权人士)
杨华仁(湖北,法律工作者)
魏 勤(上海,维权人士)
苏祖祥(湖北,教师)
沈玉莲(上海,维权人士)
关洪山(湖北,人权捍卫者)
宋先科(广东,商人)
汪国强(湖北,人权捍卫者)
陈恩娟(上海,维权人士)
李 勇(北京,媒体人)
常雄发(上海,维权人士)
王京龙(北京,管理学者)
许正清(上海,维权人士)
高军生(陕西,编辑)
郑蓓蓓(上海,维权人士)
王定华(湖北,律师)
谈兰英(上海,维权人士)
范燕琼(福建,人权捍卫者)
林 辉(浙江,诗人)
吴华英(福建,人权捍卫者)
薛振标(浙江,民主人士)
董国菁(上海,人权捍卫者)
陈玉峰(湖北,法律工作者)
段若飞(上海,人权捍卫者)
王中陵(陕西,教师)
董春华(上海,人权捍卫者)
陈修琴(上海,人权捍卫者)
刘正有(四川,人权捍卫者)
马 萧(北京,作家)
万延海(北京,公共卫生专家)
沈佩兰(上海,维权人士)
叶孝刚(浙江,大学退休教师)
张劲松(安徽,工人)
章锦发(浙江,退休人员)
王丽卿(上海,维权人士)
赵常青(陕西,作家)
金月花(上海,维权人士)
余樟法(广西,作家)
陈启勇(上海,维权人士)
刘贤斌(四川,民主人士)
欧阳懿(四川,人权捍卫者)
邓焕武(重庆,商人)
贺伟华(湖南,民主人士)
李东卓(湖南,IT从业者)
田永德(内蒙,人权捍卫者)
智效民(山西,学者)
李昌玉(山东,教师)
郭卫东(浙江,职员)
陈 卫(四川,民主人士)
王金安(湖北,企业主)
察文君(上海,维权人士)
侯述明(湖北,企业主)
刘汉南(湖北,人权捍卫者)
史若平(山东,教授)
张忍祥(湖北,人权捍卫者)
野 渡(广东,编辑)
夏 刚(湖北,人权捍卫者)
赵国良(湖南,民主人士)
李智英(北京,学者)
张重发(贵州,民主人士)
陈永苗(北京,学者)
江 婴(天津,诗人)
田祖湘(贵州,民主人士)
黄志佳(湖北,公务员)
关业波(湖北,公务员)
王望明(湖北,企业主)
高新瑞(湖北,企业家)
宋水泉(湖北,法律工作者)
赵景洲(黑龙江,人权捍卫者)
温克坚(浙江,学者)
魏文英(云南,教师)
陈惠娟(黑龙江,人权捍卫者)
陈炎雄(湖北,教师)
段春芳(上海,人权捍卫者)
刘正善(云南,工程师)
关 敏(湖北,大学教师)
戴元龙(福建,企业主)
余以为 (广东,自由撰稿人)
韩祖荣(福建,企业主)
汪定亮(湖北,律师)
陈青林(北京,人权捍卫者)
钱世顺(广东,企业主)
曾伯炎(四川,作家)
马亚莲(上海,人权捍卫者)
车宏年(山东,自由撰稿人)
秦志刚(山东,电子工程师)
宋翔峰(湖北,教师)
邓复华(湖北,作家)
徐 康(湖北,公务员)
李建强(山东,律师)
李仁兵(北京,律师)
裘美丽(上海,维权人士)
兰志学(北京,律师)
周锦昌(浙江,退休人员)
黄燕明(贵州,民主人士)
刘 巍 (北京,律师)
鄢烈汉(湖北,企业主)
陈德富(贵州,民主人士)
郭用新(湖北,医生)
郭永丰(广东,中国公民监政会发起人)
袁新亭 (广州,编辑)
戚惠民 (浙江,民主人士)
李 宇(四川,采编)
谢福林(湖南,人权捍卫者)
徐 光(浙江,企业主)
野 火 (广东,自由撰稿人)
邹 巍(浙江,维权人士)
萧利彬(浙江,工程师)
高海兵(浙江,民主人士)
田奇庄(河北, 作家)
邓太清(山西,民主人士)
裴鸿信(河北,教师)
徐 民(吉林,法律工作者)
李喜阁(河南,维权人士)
王德邦(北京,作家)
冯秋盛(广东,农民)
侯文豹(安徽,维权人士)
唐吉田(北京,律师)
刘荣超(安徽,农民)
李天翔(河南,工人)
崔玉振(河北,律师)
许茂连(安徽,农民)
翟林华(安徽,教师)
陶晓霞(安徽,农民)
张 望(福建,工人)
黄大川(辽宁,职员)
陈啸原(海南,职员)
张鉴康(陕西,法律工作者)
张星水(北京,律师)
马纲权(北京,律师)
王金祥(湖北,维权人士)
王家英(湖北,企业主)
鄢来云(湖北,企业主)
李小明(湖北,维权人士)
肖水祥(湖北,维权人士)
鄢裕祥(湖北,维权人士)
刘 毅(北京,画家)
张正祥(云南,环保人士)

10/09/2008

中國「犯罪分子」 衝刺和平獎

諾貝爾和平獎揭盅前一日,10月9日,中國政府再次厲聲反對此獎青睞中國,反對此獎嘉許中國人。

「胡佳是什么人,大家也都知道,他是由于犯了煽动颠覆国家政权罪,而被中国的司法机关依法判处有期徒刑的犯罪分子。」

中國外交部發言人秦剛警告,諾貝爾而和平獎不要頒予中國的「犯罪分子」。

最大共產黨國家蘇聯壽終正寢後,中國是當世唯一拒絕諾貝爾獎的國家。

此前,兩位被迫流亡異國的「中國人」獲諾貝爾獎,1989年西藏精神領袖達賴喇嘛膺和平獎,2000年流亡作家高行健膺文學獎,中國政府無不怒髮衝冠。

外間盛傳中國維權人士,胡佳夫婦或高智晟律師,是本年度諾貝爾和平獎大熱,若美願成真,則是中國國內公民,首次獲獎,中國政府一如既往舉腳反對。

此前,回應胡佳獲獎大熱傳聞,9月26日,中國外交部發言人劉建超警告:諾貝爾和平獎應該頒給「正確的人」。今日外交部發言人秦剛也教訓,除了胡佳,「千千萬萬個有資格獲得這個奖項的人能在中國查找」。

但是,諾貝爾獎的標準,一向與中國政府的「正確」標準,背道而馳。達賴喇嘛高行健,胡佳高智晟,這些受青睞的中國人,或飄零異國,或陷身牢獄(據稱高智晟律師被軟禁),無一不是中國政府的「對立面」,無一不遭中國政府驅逐打壓。

達賴喇嘛,高行健,早已先後越牆而出,逃離牢籠,擁抱自由。胡佳,高智晟還留守中國,因替他人爭取自由而成為此牢籠中最不自由的囚犯。

因悲天憫人而自投羅網的中國「犯罪分子」,最終會是受本年度諾貝爾和平獎嘉許的「正確的人」嗎?

9/26/2008

諾貝爾和平獎 胡佳呼聲高


胡佳於北京奧運前夕入獄。五月香港傳奧運聖火期間,人權組織展示抗議橫幅



諾貝爾獎對中國人是榮耀,對中國政府卻是羞辱。歷史上,中國人奪諾貝爾獎,對中國政府從來都是壞消息。1989年,西藏精神領袖達賴喇嘛膺諾貝爾和平獎, 中國政府怒斥「反華」,2000年,流亡作家高行健膺諾貝爾文學獎,中國政府痛批「偏見」。昨日,傳出在獄人權鬥士胡佳有機會為中國人再奪第二個諾貝爾和平獎,中國政府的表情,不難想知。

外交部發言人劉建超的反對之聲,描畫出中國政府的表情:

「如果诺贝尔和平奖是授予真正维护世界和平的人,那就应该授给正确的人。我们希望有关方面在这一问题上能作出正确决定,不要做违背诺贝尔和平奖初衷、伤害中国人民感情的事。」

25日,Guardian引述密切關注諾貝爾和平獎評審動向的瑞典學者分析,即將於十月十日揭盅的諾貝爾和平獎,拜北京奧運所賜,極有機會花落中國,胡佳以中國維權人士代表之身,問鼎呼聲最高:

"The prize will go this year to a Chinese dissident and I believe the most likely [recipient] will be Hu Jia, perhaps together with his wife [Zeng Jinyan]"
"He has become the most well known Chinese dissident now and it has been a very long time since anyone [related to China] has won the prize."

何以西方人士推測,諾貝爾和平獎評委眼中,在舉辦北京奧運的2008年,也正是在此年被中國政府判以「煽動顛覆國家罪」的胡佳,是有資格逐鹿此獎的「正確的人」?Guardian引述另一位接近諾貝爾委員會的學者分析:

"There was a lot of repression during the Olympic Games. Now is a golden opportunity to underline that repression is unacceptable"

無論2008年諾貝爾和平獎能否花落中國,無論胡佳能否代表中國維權人士獲獎,胡佳獲獎呼聲高漲本身顯示,奧運沒有改變中國,北京奧運也沒能改變「西方」對中國的「偏見」,京奧前後一以貫之:同一個世界,不同的人權。

8/05/2008

1982年索忍尼辛:给自由中国


( 司儀;索忍尼辛 / 男 )
(索忍尼辛在自由中國,索忍尼辛在中山堂演講/司儀報告索忍尼辛演講相關事項)
吳三連文藝基金會主辦索忍尼辛演講會,4點報告。1、今天演講長度前後共50分鐘,2、索忍尼辛不回答問題,3、請了教授王兆彬做翻譯,4、感謝新聞局提供的協助。
(索忍尼辛在自由中國,索忍尼辛在中山堂演講/索忍尼辛演講)
和人民生活各方面都有顯著的成就,並且顯示出如果大陸不淪入敵人之手,國家的力量一定會朝向同樣明確的方向發展,我總覺得是人會認清這種含有教訓意義的比較。會清楚的看到,凡是逃離共黨的人民是多麼繁榮,而陷入共黨統下的人民卻有千百萬人慘死,共產黨在蘇俄,在波蘭,在寮國的殘暴史實,早已為大家所熟知,至於在中央,在越南在北韓,千百萬生靈被摧毀的史賓相信早晚也會很詳盡地被揭開,即使在今天,我們仍然能從一些蛛絲馬跡中推斷出來,其實並不如此,事實上自由中竟受到其他國家,非常不公平和不平等的待遇,世界上大多數的國家都不顧道義,把你們逼出聯合國,自從他們把1700萬自由中國人,排除聯合國之門後,這些代表雖然仍在那裡繼續叫囂,唏噓,吶喊著可是聯合國卻以便成了一個,不負責任滑稽劇場而自取其辱了,在這裡,第三世界,許多國家也向喪失理性的瘋子一般。扮演著跳樑小丑,他們不知道自由的真諦,而坐待壓迫桎悎得到來,至於西方世界若干世紀以來,早已熟知自由的真諦,可是由於長久以來,生活在幸福安樂之中,他們為自由所付出的,有愈來愈少的傾向,西方人一項珍視自己的國家的體制「自由民主」,但是為保衛這一體制,挺身而出的人愈來愈少了,西方保衛自己能力正一個年代不如一個年代地衰退,喪失中,一個國家接著一個國家的背叛行為,只是為了自身的苟安,這種現象在二次大戰前就已經開始了,到戰後,更不惜出賣了整個東歐,只是為了能夠使自己的幸福生活持續的更久一些,波蘭米可拉伊奇科政權多麼輕易地被出賣了,同樣地,自己的戰時盟友蔣介石也被輕易地出賣了,不久的將來我們也會看到一個西方國家。只是為了茍全自己而出賣另一個國家,大多數恐懼共黨的西方國家為了怕激怒中共,甚至於不敢出售武器給貴國;你們對這點會感到驚奇嗎?事實上,他們對自由的維護和關懷根本是微不足道的,目前飽受威脅的歐洲最可能了解這種情況,可是怎麼都害怕承認中華民國和鄭遭受威脅的亞州國家呢?不久前日本首相曾經說過,如果武裝自由中國,會給遠東帶來不安,可是真如此的話,那還有什麼可說的呢?他們不斷地尋求苟安之道,選擇自己的替身而置身事外,並且創初一個迷人的神話說:有「壞」的共產主義,也有「好」的共產主義,利用這個神話,把中共塑造成一個本質善良的和平締造者。當南韓目前免於遭受共黨攻擊之際,又產生了一種神話,也不足為奇;誤認為蘇俄並不仇恨他們,蘇俄不像北韓那樣是南韓的直接敵人,現在他們為了盡量討好北京。而正在搖擺佈定,是不是該把中共投誠的飛機交給自由中國呢?這種神話的來源,並不足由於他們,沒有遠見或是愚蠢,而是由於絕望和精神喪失的緣故,美國對貴國的關係是很特殊的,到今天為止,美國的唯一保證就是使台灣不受共黨攻擊,可是今天美國要保持對台灣的忠實承諾有多困難呢?要知道它對貴國的承諾已經喪失泰半,美國也以屈服於世界上普遍的逆流,要背棄台灣陷自由中國的命運於為難的境地。而不惜背叛許多自由國家。正因如此,他們欣然響應中共和平統一的虛偽建議,許多美國記者大聲疾呼,目前「北京」一定會遵守。實踐和平統一的諾言,可是他們完全忘記了,共產黨人已經不只一次地欺騙了世人,戰後東歐若干政府和共黨聯合的經驗並沒有給世人留下任何教訓,而現在這種。沒有希望的聯合政府的試驗,又在寮國重演,同樣地,在季辛吉和北越簽訂合約之後。世人一直到北越決定侵占越南那天為止,都還相信北越會遵守諾言的住的美國傳播媒體,設置愚蠢到這種程度,意然說美國並沒有犯任何錯誤,如果說中共違反諾言,以武力侵占台灣,那時美國又將可不受義務的約束,而再度開始運送武器,到那時武器交給誰呢?這種囈語竟然出現在美國很都多主要的報章上,他們這樣做究竟為了什麼?恐怕連他們自己都不明白吧!美國有權威的人士竟想迫使台灣去做投降式的談判,讓台灣自願地獻出自己的自由和力量。中共到底想向你們要些什麼呢?當然他們渴望侵佔你們繁榮的經濟,掠奪和吞時你們的一切再經歷了20世紀許多大事件之後,只有一些短視無知的人,才會相信「北京」的諾言,認為他們會完全保留你們的經濟社會制度,甚至你們的武裝力量,同時讓你們也保留某些自由的要素,對他們來說主要的並不在於要剝奪你們的財物,剽竊你們辛苦得來的果實而是在於不管在什麼地方,也不管是什麼事情,共黨制度也都不能容忍有一點點的偏差,與其說,它所需要的事富足的寶島,毋寧說它需要抑制,脫離它制度的偏差,因為讓其他的中國「指大陸同胞」知道由沒有共產主義。中共所不能容忍的是你們經濟和社會的優勢,可能生活得更好,那是不可以的,在共黨的意識形勢裡,是不容許有任何自由島嶼存在的,所以就連,他們也千方百計地制止銷售給他們,以便削弱你們的戰鬥力量,破壞海峽的均勢,使他們入侵台灣的日期提早來臨,為了促使美國漠視台灣,中共已開始利用它和蘇俄的和解,「玩蘇俄牌」而這種和解並不是完全故作姿勢,而是有其遠景的,因為兩個共黨政權畢竟是出自同一根源的,有一件事現在大家早已忘記了哪就是,1923年,蘇俄的代表魯金別格--化名「鮑羅亭」。曾經準備在中國發動共產主義的政變,因此,他才把毛澤東,周恩來提升到黨內最高地位,我在此之所以把這些奉告各位乃是由於你們你們所面臨的事致命的威脅,幸好這一點在台灣的人工,即使並全部。但大多數人都很了解,你們對這種威脅的了解顯然的比南韓要好得多,在南韓,年輕的一代和大學生,完全忘了共黨侵略所帶來短暫的恐懼,而覺得他們所享有的自由似乎太少,可是,一但當他們兩守被縛被押送共黨集中營的時候,他們就會懷念和重估今天他們所謂「不自由」的價值,在西方似乎流行著一種潮流,那就是向站在反共前線的國家,伺在敵人炮火威脅下的國家,要求廣泛的民主,不只是普通的民主,而是絕對的放任,以及背叛國和任意破壞國家的權利,西方國家不僅允許這些行為在他們自己的國家發生,而且更要求每一個受敵人威脅的國家,包括貴國在內也要付出同樣的代價;所幸。在台灣我覺得大家對這種行為都能有理性的節制。這都是為了在反共鬥爭中能夠堅持下去的緣故,可是,另一個危險正在虎視眈眈地環伺著,貴國的經濟成就和民生富裕具有雙重特性,一方它是全中國人明光明希望的所寄,另一方面它也可能顯露出你們的弱點,因為所有生活富裕的人們容易喪失對危機的警覺,沉緬於今日的生活,結果可能喪失了抗敵意志。我希望並且呼籲你們,能夠揚棄這一弱點。在你們物質生活有所成就的時候,不要讓你們的青年懦弱到寧願做敵人的俘虜和奴隸,也不願意去戰鬥你們在台灣33年的和平生活,並不意味今後3年你們不會遭受攻擊,你們不是生活在一各無憂無慮的寶島上,你們應該全國皆兵,因為你們不斷受著戰爭的威脅,你們1800萬的人口,所面臨問題的深度,正如同猶太人一樣,但是猶太人的問題,曾引起許多國家的注意,而成為當今世界的中心問題,你們的特殊情況,跟猶太人比較一下,我不理解為什麼台灣命運不能博得世界的注意呢?當前世界出賣弱者的現象甚囂塵上,說實在的,你們只有依賴你們自己本身的力量,可是你們也有一個更大更光明的希望,那就市被奴役國家的人民,不會無限度的忍耐下去,當他們的統治者們面臨嚴重危機的時候,他們就會揭竿而起來推翻暴政。在我閱讀過你們許多書籍當中,瞭解到你們的寶島,乃是民族復興的基地,但願它是!自救和防衛部應該是你們最後的目標,你們最後的目標應該是幫助和姐就你們在大陸受難的同班,首先,最要的是盡量而勇敢的運用你們的廣播和電視的傳播功能。似乎在別人的心目中無法指出誰是你們堅強可靠的盟友,但是你們面臨危亡之際,你們會有全世界最堅強的盟邦,那就示億萬的中國人,他們的同情與支持。就是你們的精神和士氣的最大支柱,就在幾天前,你們就收到了一個具有鼓舞性的信號。那就是唾棄共產暴政的中共飛行員架使飛機抵南韓,投奔自由,這正是表現了中國大陸人民嚮往自由的真正情感,我常常很痛心地想,中國「古拉格群島」裡許多無名的囚犯,他們的苦難也許要到21世紀才能向世人宣洩,所有被壓迫的人民,包括蘇俄人民在內,都不能依賴外界的援助,為有依靠自己的力量。如果發狂的中共和蘇俄的統治者之間發動了戰爭,整各世界都會作壁上觀的,說不定他們內心還會感到莫大的安慰,我但願這件事情不會發生,但是不管怎樣,讓我門在此位中國人和俄國人間的友好和信任作見證,甚至於在任何情況下,我們之間都不要有矛盾存在;進一步來說,我門受迫害的兩國人民應該聯合起來共同對抗2個共產政權,不管2個貪婪的。反人民的專制政權發生什麼事情,讓我門兩國人民保持互相了解,互相同情和友誼,決不讓無益的民族仇很蒙蔽了耳目,我門不知道共產主義會為禍世界多久,記得有人曾經在135年前,誇耀著向當時若干大帝國的領袖們說過,再歐洲所組成的一小撮烏托邦共產黨徒們,會用鐵和血征服這些領袖,並使他們屈膝而喪失他們的權威和驕傲,可是這些領袖對他這種狂言都認為不值一孝,因為像這樣的預言,他們認為沒有力量。共產黨的力量原本是壓榨和殘酷,而西方世界的弱點在於缺乏戰鬥的意志,我門不知道人類歷史還要走多少稀奇古怪的曲折道路,我曾經表達了我自己的推測,全世界的共產主義思想,或許比蘇俄和中共的共產主義制度存在得更久,還可能會蔓延到其他國家,因為在哪裡願意嘗試共產主義的人很多,不過在我門兩國國民的意識裡,理性的體認很佔優勢,儘管兩國人民飽經苦難喪失甚多,畢竟正在邁向自就和復興的道路。

7/13/2008

傳太子黨插手賭王家族惡鬥


周秉德與澳門何氏家族何鴻章。本期《壹週刊》圖片。


本期《壹週刊》爆,中共太子黨插手何鴻燊與其胞妹何婉琪之豪門家族恩怨,周恩來侄女周秉德及張姓前國防部長(疑似張愛萍)之子為十姑娘撐腰,力抗澳門賭王。

報導稱,「○二年初十姑娘被何鴻燊踢出澳娛董事局之後,她找來中央前國防部部長的兒子張先生作為代表,與何鴻燊『講數』,何鴻燊得悉十姑娘有張先生撐腰,本打算找葉劍英的後人幫拖,但礙於張先生的影響力凌駕於葉家,才打消這個念頭」。何鴻燊與「張先生」兩度交手講數,第二次在珠海會面,「還找來當時的統戰部常務副部長劉延東出席」。事後談判不果,「協助安排這場和談的人士,亦十分尷尬。事關何鴻燊通過當時的港澳辦主任廖暉向北京打小報告,指張先生『敲詐』他二億元」。

姑且毋論以上故事之可靠性真實性,傳說中的中共太子黨事蹟,在中國國內是宮闈秘辛,引為政治禁忌,民間野史津津樂道,但絕跡公開傳媒,正如各級高幹乃至領導人的私人財產是國家機密一樣,永遠秘不可考。上週,中國犬儒知識份子名報《南方週末》自吹自擂稱,中共第六代太子黨(習近平薄熙來等後人)在國內傳媒拋頭露面,登雜誌,上電視,「反映中國政治日益開放和透明」,香港特色犬儒報《明報》昨日以「破禁」名之,異口同聲驚為黨國創舉。

中國高壓政治下的政治意淫,新聞檢查制度下的新聞性壓抑,傳染至香港,自張曉卿君臨以來不知應當界定為「溫和民主報」抑「溫和保皇報」的《明報》「溫和」得忘本:「政治開放和透明」的定義,是自由報導,不是選擇性放料,是原形畢露,不是塗脂抹粉。

「國情」所在,特權階級與「顛覆分子」同等待遇,皆為不見天日,但事有湊巧,龍子鳳孫皇室貴胄高調拋頭露面之際,反對派也悄然綻露流光餘韻。

曹長青,劉賓雁,兩位中共政治黑名單人物(後者已逝世),突然「破禁」現身國內傳媒,書評雜誌《書城》七月號刊學者李慶西回憶文章《社團風雲》,潑墨記述八十年代大學生爭取結社自由思想自由參政議政的一段朝氣蓬勃煙塵往事,其大學同學曹長青及大學生偶像劉賓雁,「資產階級自由化分子」絕世風采躍然紙上。